Fast denies government rejected Chinese free trade talks offer

In a committee appearance Monday, Trade Minister Ed Fast rejected an opposition MP’s assertion that the Harper government turned down an offer from the Chinese to launch bilateral free trade agreement negotiations.

It’s an interpretation that puts him at odds with the former president and CEO of the Asia Pacific Foundation, Yuen Pao Woo.

Last November, Australia concluded free trade negotiations with China, prompting Canadian business groups to call on the Conservatives to do the same and expand their already full plate of ongoing trade talks.

The assumption, of course, was that the decision was the Harper government’s to make.

As part of a panel in Ottawa in 2012, and again before the trade committee in February 2014, Yuen Pao Woo was adamant that China had made the offer.

“China has offered to negotiate a free trade agreement with Canada. They offered to the prime minister when he was there very recently. They offered four times. And I’m astonished that we haven’t sort of jumped all over this offer,” he said in April 2012.

“The fact is that China has offered to negotiate with us. They haven’t offered to negotiate with most other industrialized countries,” he said in February 2014.

Since the government has made the argument that Canadian exporters would be at a competitive disadvantage in other markets without a trade agreement — in Panama and South Korea, for example — NDP MP Laurin Liu challenged Fast Monday on the logic of that not applying in China as well.

“Australia recently concluded a comprehensive trade agreement with China, and we know that your government rejected an offer by the Chinese government to negotiate a similar deal with Canada. Can you explain why the Conservative government rejected that offer and whether giving Australian businesses first-market access … first-mover advantage is a wise policy?” she asked.

Fast rejected the premise of the question.

“Let me correct you. We didn’t reject an offer of negotiating a free trade agreement with China,” he said.

“All we have said, for the time being, there are a number of other avenues we have to deepen our engagement — our economic engagement — with China.”

“I also note that Australia is, of course, in some ways unique, because Australia’s largest trading partner is actually China. Canada’s largest trading partner is the United States — by far,” Fast said.

“Just to give you a comparator, our bilateral trade with China is somewhere in order of $80 billion a year. Our bilateral trade, if you include services, with the United States, is somewhere in the order of $800 billion a year. And we have a trade agreement with our largest trade partner.”

Not holding his breath for TPP

With the Obama administration ramping up lobbying efforts to get Trade Promotion Authority legislation through Congress — an essential step before its Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiating partners make any difficult concessions — Fast also declined to make any predictions Monday about when the 12-country talks might conclude.

“As you know, these negotiations were to be concluded in 2011. Then they were supposed to be concluded in 2012. Then 2013. Then 2014. All I can tell you is that my focus isn’t primarily the timeline — it is the quality of the deal. Is there going to be an outcome that Canadians can broadly support and is in the national interest? That is my chief concern,” he told reporters after the committee meeting.

Earlier he reaffirmed the Conservatives’ intention — if somewhat ambiguously — to protect the supply managed dairy, poultry, and egg industries being targeted in the TPP talks.

“We have consistently stated that our government will continue to promote and defend the interests of our supplied managed sector, as we promote and defend our agricultural industry more broadly speaking. We did that within the CETA negotiations. We will do that within our Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations,” he said.

“But at the end of the day, what we are looking for is a balanced outcome that actually promotes Canada’s trade interests — that actually promotes economic growth within Canada — and that provides a benefit to all sectors of the economy.”